Newsletter

Posted May 6, 2013 06:42 pm - Updated May 6, 2013 07:20 pm

The Editor's Desk: Lobbying 'reform' law barely a beginning

Gov. Nathan Deal was correct in saying that the lobbying reform bill he signed into law Monday represents “a considerable step forward,” but that’s only because there were no limits whatsoever on lobbyists’ spending on state lawmakers — as long as that spending was reported to the state ethics commission — before he put pen to paper at a signing ceremony. And even with the governor’s signature, the new law doesn’t go into effect until Jan. 1, giving enterprising lobbyists plenty of time to lavish attention on lawmakers in advance of next year’s legislative session, which kicks off on Jan. 13, 2014.

In other remarks Monday, Deal said officials could not expect the public to trust them “unless we have put in place those measures whereby with certainty they know that we have their best interests in mind.”

Frankly, though, the new law doesn’t meet the lofty standard intoned by the governor, in that it falls far short of letting Georgia citizens know “with certainty” that lobbyists will no longer have the access and influence that their money allows them to enjoy with lawmakers on behalf of their various clients.

First, let’s consider the provision of the new law that supposedly limits lobbyists’ expenditures on travel, lodging, registration, food and beverages to $75. It’s important to note that the law doesn’t say how often a lobbyist can spend up to $75 on a lawmaker for those purposes. Also, the law notes that the limit applies to “any individual lobbyist,” meaning that if a lawmaker is wined and dined by two lobbyists, that “limit” jumps to $150. And, presumably, that “limit” could be reached multiple times in a single day.

Also under the new law, lobbyists can cover the full range of transportation, lodging, travel, registration and food and beverage expenses for a lawmaker, his or her spouse, and necessary staff members for “educational, informational, charitable or civic meetings” held in the United States that “directly relate to the official duties” of the lawmaker.

It’s not hard to imagine both lobbyists and lawmakers employing the widest possible definitions for those two phrases in the law, and in the process, all but daring some public-interest group or private citizen to engage in a protracted and costly legal battle to rein in conduct plainly in violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of the law.

Much is also being made of the fact that, under the new law, lobbyists are not allowed to provide tickets to sporting events or concerts unless the recipient pays face value for the ticket. Notwithstanding the fact that a face value ticket might, in fact, be a real deal for any given event, I’m just cynical enough to think that lobbyists and lawmakers might be able to get around that provision by scheduling some sort of conference at an event venue at the same time that a concert or sporting event is occurring. But maybe that’s just me.

And, OK, the signing of the lobbying reform bill on Monday represented the first work by lawmakers to ensure public trust in their actions, which deserves some positive notice. But no one, least of all this state’s legislators, should pretend that there’s not a long way to go before the public can be convinced that lobbyists don’t exercise undue influence over the legislative process.

RECOMMENDED READING: Local public education advocate Bertis Down recently wrote a commentary for the EmpowerED website, at http://bit.ly/11kszal.